tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post8710693840020554272..comments2023-11-22T09:00:59.909-08:00Comments on Atheistwatch: The issue of Rod Swift and Christians more likely to go to prison Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)http://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-16674987400177344892014-09-03T05:21:37.253-07:002014-09-03T05:21:37.253-07:00Swift said:"The data was supplied in a tabula...Swift said:"The data was supplied in a tabular format, which Adherents abused.<br /><br />For the information requested Denise Golumbaski tabulated data, and quite pointedly suggested that data was not known for all prisoners in federal detention at the time.<br /><br />It is DISHONEST to suggest that the tabulate data of unknown responses (e.g. no answer known) is the same as being an 'atheist'.<br /><br />It is disingenuous to lump all no-answers into some default answer of being an avowed atheist.<br /><br />Therefore the only correct methodology is to exclude the data, or assume that the sample size of remaining data is applicable. "<br /><br /><br /><b>Meta:</b> Nothing dishonest about it. The data didn't tally between the two copies, even categories were confused. So I had every right to ask what was up and to suggest the possibility of what appeared to be the case.<br /><br />What's really dishonest is to not reflect the opponents criticism honestly but to re shape it into a straw man that you can easily answer.<br /><br />I did not say we can lump everything unknown into an assumption that they are all atheists. I said the possibility is there <b>BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW.</b> until we know those answers your argument is not made.<br /><br /><br />"Therefore the only correct methodology is to exclude the data,"<br /><br /><b>Meta:</b> Excluding the data would mean your argument is not made. your original data must be excluded.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-91104081077689983572014-09-03T05:15:36.377-07:002014-09-03T05:15:36.377-07:00you have not answered the switching argument. Pew ...you have not answered the switching argument. Pew study gives us reason to believe that most of the Christians in prison became Christians in prison. Thus the premise of your argument is disproved.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-29446174521359327942014-08-23T22:31:15.329-07:002014-08-23T22:31:15.329-07:00I have made further comments on this blog post, wh...I have made further comments on this blog post, which has verified the data decades later :)<br /><br />http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/07/16/what-percentage-of-prisoners-are-atheists-its-a-lot-smaller-than-we-ever-imagined/rodcubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14834471581091090723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-933938430158496712014-08-23T22:19:35.401-07:002014-08-23T22:19:35.401-07:00The data was supplied in a tabular format, which A...The data was supplied in a tabular format, which Adherents abused.<br /><br />For the information requested Denise Golumbaski tabulated data, and quite pointedly suggested that data was not known for all prisoners in federal detention at the time.<br /><br />It is DISHONEST to suggest that the tabulate data of unknown responses (e.g. no answer known) is the same as being an 'atheist'.<br /><br />It is disingenuous to lump all no-answers into some default answer of being an avowed atheist.<br /><br />Therefore the only correct methodology is to exclude the data, or assume that the sample size of remaining data is applicable.rodcubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14834471581091090723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-90936914151650490192012-09-30T06:40:04.866-07:002012-09-30T06:40:04.866-07:00If you are really Swift you don't under the da...If you are really Swift you don't under the data they sent to you. this is real imporatnt a skylurke did not answer, so you need to get your answer. did they send you the data in the form of a table or did you make the table?<br /><br />the category of the 20% was not No answer. it was no answer for the question "what is your religion." it wasn't necessarily just people that didn't' answer, it's also people who check I" don't have a religion.It could and does include atheists.<br /><br />your claim that adherents messed with the data is just a lie and you know it is. To pretend there are no atheists in the 20% is stupid and you know that. there have to be some if the other category was "what is your religion." not all atheist will call atheists their religion. It's totally reasonable to expect that some atheist seen atheism as having no religion (probalby the majority do).<br /><br />the only difference in the way the data is used is presentation not the data itself. Adherents didn't do any thing wrong but they included the category in the table and reflected it more accurately.<br /><br />Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-85267046532853007812012-09-30T01:33:24.895-07:002012-09-30T01:33:24.895-07:00Just for the record:
Adherents dodgied up the fig...Just for the record:<br /><br />Adherents dodgied up the figures.<br />I should know, I am *the* Rod Swift who originally requested the data.<br /><br />It is erroneous to assume all non-respondents to the then-survey are 'all atheists/agnostics' as the Adherents site did in inflating the figures.<br /><br />A non-response is just that. No response. This may have been for any one of a number of reasons: not being surveyed, not answering the question if surveyed, not answering any of the survey, or joining the prison population after the survey had been completed at a site -- just for example.<br /><br />What can be extrapolated from the data is that there is a sizeable enough data set to draw general conclusions about the fact that, believe it or not, religion pretty much doesn't have much bearing on keeping people moral and uncriminal :)<br /><br />Rod Swiftrodcubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14834471581091090723noreply@blogger.com